to think that many SAHMs/part-time workers would have chosen differently with the benefit of hindsight?

[working9while5]

Just a thought, have come across this on another forum and wondering how it applies to me.

I have just the one dc. Originally, I was desperate to be a SAHM but grudgingly decided to go back p/t but cut it back to the bare, bare minimum (2 days a week).

A few months down the line, if I am honest I am wondering how much my decision was framed by having a small, non-mobile baby and enjoying lunches with friends and Summer walks. As the hormones/baby shock wears off, I do wonder why I am not going back to work 3 or even 4 days.. and if my thinking was very short-term.

Unfortunately, I effectively "gave away" the bulk of my permanent, public sector job and there is a job freeze in my area. So, my (hormonally-driven? rose-tinted?) decision, while not final, is not so easy to go back on. I am studying for a postgrad too, so it's not the end of the world.. but it has made me think.

I wondered what mothers who are much further down the line think with the benefit of hindsight? Was that initial decision the right one for you, or was it influenced by newbabyitis?

Hmm... yes, 17 hours is a popular one.

Blueshoes - I was talking to a woman I know (note I dont say 'friend') the other day.. she hasnt worked since her child was born apart from a bit of half hearted childminding 4 years ago. She told me she was going for an interview for a full time job as a nursery assistnat. She said she hadn't tole them yet that she only wanted 17 hours but that when she didn they'd surely have to consider her becuas eof her 'rights'

I just stared at her incredulously.. are people really that out of touch with reality?!

But yes nellie agreed it is greatthat you have kept your skills up to date over these 5 years and it goes without saying that when you are ready to work full time again you will be way in front of those who have simply taken 5 years out.

VH said her employee was a good teacher, so presumably she is not deskilled so I can't see why it was unreasonable for her to ask for flexible hours.

Again blueshoes, i didn't say they weren't strangers

I answered the timetabling question perfectly btw- I think it just wasn't the answer you wanted to hear!
And we have a number of very effective job share arrangements in my school thanks. With the particular member of staff that I mentioned, the problem would arise out of her being completely inflexible and dictating which days she wanted to work. This would result in 40 or so students not receiving the amount of teaching they need for A level and IB. I am not prepared to compromise the interests of 40 students, in the year they are applying for university, simply to enable one person to work on 3 days of their choosing, rather than the 3 days which the school needs them.

Negotiation Analysis at some tinpot pseudo professional 'business school'? No thanks!

I agree morald that people playing the system in that way make it difficult for women and men who genuinly want a balance on returning to work.

I didnt say childminders were as good as family.. I said my childminder did a better job than i would

My kids want to play instruments loudly, and paint with their feets, and make cakes with lurid coloured icing... I'm crap at all that. Come bedtime they want mummy to read them a story and sing them a song when they go to bed. I'm good at that. I'm also good at making money, without which they'd be in a bit of a pickle..

tinky, I quote you: 'so it is acceptable for women or men who want to work flexible hours to be passed over by employers in favour of those without children (or those with children who are prepared to let a stranger do the majority of childcare)"

So pray tell what you consider to be 'stranger' childcare that does not fall within the categories of teachers, before and after school carers, nurseries/nursery workers, nannies and childminders, I mentioned.

Or have you lost the thread of your own argument. I would not be surprised.

Stop being outraged, violethill - that is the point .

I suppose that the sort of training budget that state schools have doesn't allow for proper business education, just, as you rightly say, the tinpot schools. Oh well! You could read a book about it instead.

Ah, we agreed on something tinky

so you are cross in the way in which she asked for flexible hours. How would you have prefered her to ask? Do you think it is innapropriate to suggest days or was it her tone that annoyed you?

Tinky- read the thread. No problem with asking about flexible working. Big problem with being totally inflexible about it. I job shared myself when my children were tiny, ( being looked after by strangers at nursery lol) and the arrangement worked well because I approached it professionally and didn't cry 'sex discrimination' if I didn't happen to get the days off I would have preferred. Weds is often a popular day, as some people don't like working more than two days consecutively... Thing is, the structure of many organisations doesn't allow for everyone who'd quite fancy wednesdays off to do it. In schools, for example, the same number of lessons and pupils still need to be taught every day!

"Many working women use childminders who to all intent and purposes are as good as family.. "

violethill, very sensible not to waste funds on a bullshit business school course when you don't need it. Common sense is free.

X posts there!
It was the tone and attitude. She seemed to not consider for one moment the fact that a lot of 6th form students would be adversely affected if the school gave her exactly what she wanted.
Most bizarre, as shes an intelligent and capable woman.

"In schools, for example, the same number of lessons and pupils still need to be taught every day."

Not necessarily. Or you can group certain sorts of lessons on one day a week. Look around the world for inspiration!

Crossed threads MD

Would you like to elaborate on your knowledge of my school's training budget bonsoir? Is that another area of your endless knowledge and wisdom?!

Again I agree with bonsoir.
I'm sure it would take a good deal of reorganising but is it really impossible to work out something that would benefit both parties?

violethill, you need to prioritise your training budget on worthless business school courses for people who don't need it. Not on trying to meet students' needs with constrained teaching resources.

I obviously have no idea about your school's training budget, but since you wrote that you would have to go to a tinpot business school for training, I infer that the budget is limited - which would hardly be unusual.

Rofl at idea of writing the timetable to suit one member of staff!!

The whole point bonsoir, is that it is ALREADY written very creatively, taking into account the optimum learning times for certain subjects , matching specialist teachers and teaching styles to each subject and ability group.... But clearly we really should be re writing it not in the interests of student learning but so that one member of staff can stay home on Wednesdays!!!!

Yes, some jobs can be done part time. But our GP was very much part time and that essentially meant you virtually never had her because what was the chance she was actualyl working on the day you wanted the appointment - very very slim chance. You could see others but I don't think it worked better for us that she was part time. For tax payers who paid her to train as a doctor though to keep her part time was probably just about worth it.

As for a class teacher in a primary school they build a close and lovely relationship often with their class. The children like the security of knowing Mrs Jones is their teacher and she is there every day unlike in some state schools with high staff turnover and a successful of changing people sometimes (not all). As parents pay fees schools have to obey market demand rather than just operate by Government dictat and children thus benefit.

If you run BP or present cases in court or do operations which last 7 hours you can't work 3 hours a day. Also for employers it is such a hassle employing anyone that to have two not one employees is a huge extra burden. if you get 2 people who work harder than one full timer it can work well. If you get 2 always skiving off when the baby is sick rather than paying for back up care and who turn up late and leave earkly then it's a bad deal. There is no right to flexible working in the UK. You can request it but employers can say no and that's the right balance.

(Plenty of housewives are pretty rotten mothers and their children would benefit from someone nicer and better looking after them. Blood ties don't always mean the best care. Teachers of 3 and 4 year olds in british pre schools and schools are as said above as much "strangers" as childminders. our first daily nanny stayed for 10 years (and after 7 years brought one and then two of her babies to work with her). That is longer than some husbands stick around.)

Bonsoir - Am I detecting snobery over public schools...?
Do your children attend private school?
How is that funded..?

tinky many women... not all women. Many women do have childminders who are as good as family.

Ah bonsoir, I suspect violethill meant that all business schools are tinpot. A view that she is not alone in holding.

As for your dig about her school having a limited budget, welcome to the Real World. It is the same for her as it is in my global organisation that uses crackpot consultants the business schools churn out, though less these days.

VH, I have been informed by the NUT that schools have very little excuse for not agreeing to flexible hours for the very fact that time tables can be reorganised to suit both staff and pupils. No financial loss would be incurred etc.